Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

ere isn't a whole lot of difference between wanting to wipe out an ideology (Communism or Capitalism) and wanting to wipe out an ethnicity. Both entail a lack of rational decision making, as evidence in large part by the 'evil empire' rhetoric that came out of, and directed, the US in the late 70's/early 80's.

Wow thats such a blanket statement that its just...wow.


Not a lot difference between wanting to wipe out tyranny and genocide. Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. Dogma wins the Frazzled wiener dog WTF? thread award. I mean I thought I was in the running right up until then.

dogma wrote:There isn't a whole lot of difference between wanting to wipe out an ideology (Communism or Capitalism) and wanting to wipe out an ethnicity. Both entail a lack of rational decision making, as evidence in large part by the 'evil empire' rhetoric that came out of, and directed, the US in the late 70's/early 80's.

There is a huge differnce between. "I hate those guys" and "God tells us to kill them and we get into Heaven"

Do you really think that if Isreal was not a Jewish state there would still be problem in the Mid-East? And I mean problems on the scale that there is now.

I think it would be a different set of problems. After all, Iraq and Iran went at it hammer and tongs in the 80s.

jbunny wrote:
There is a huge differnce between. "I hate those guys" and "God tells us to kill them and we get into Heaven"

I don't recall any Cold War rhetoric which stopped at "I hate those guys", you're being reductionist; something that I can do just as easily. After all, the fact that God sent you to kill someone is essentially tacit to "I hate those guys".

jbunny wrote:
Do you really think that if Isreal was not a Jewish state there would still be problem in the Mid-East? And I mean problems on the scale that there is now.

So long as it was created by Western powers as part of their exit strategy from the Imperial rule, yes. Even if I didn't, why does Judaism get a free pass here? Why is that distinctly different from living in a capitalist nation, or a communist nation?

I miss the 80s.

jbunny wrote:Mann, the difference is the US and Russia were not lead by radical religious leaders that think they are doing God's work by killing all of the Jews.

That’s the thing, though. Religious people don’t have a monopoly on crazy. Stalin was crazy. Kim Jong Il is crazy. Both Bushes were theoretically born-again Christians believing in Revelations. But they didn’t push the button.

As crazy as you may think the Iranian leadership is, the majority of them are canny old bastards who want to hang on to power, not die in a mutual nuclear holocaust with Israel. Ahmadinejad is just the scary, crazy face that they use to intimidate people.

Frazzled wrote:
Not a lot difference between wanting to wipe out tyranny and genocide.

Genocide? Ahmadinejad has never said anything about genocide, or even killing all Jews. He's said a lot about destroying, removing, or otherwise eliminating Israel and Zionism, but that's not the same thing as genocide.

Yeah Jeb dont misunderstand me mate, i think im a nice fella deep down, and i wasnt advocating carpet bombing orphanages or anything, i was merely pointing out that a jolly good bombing is sometimes entirely the right thing to do..

For example, a jolly good bombing to weaken the fortified positions of the enemy before we launch a ground assault?

Good bombing!

dogma wrote:Genocide? Ahmadinejad has never said anything about genocide, or even killing all Jews. He's said a lot about destroying, removing, or otherwise eliminating Israel and Zionism, but that's not the same thing as genocide.

Yeah I am pretty sure by, "Blasting Israel from the face of the Earth," he really meant, "Send them all on vacation to Jamaica!" Those silly Iranians!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Matt: I was mostly just shocked at your comment...I didn't say I didn't laugh...

Yeah Jeb is right Dogma, i heard he was in some sense misquoted, but it most definately was something along the lines of "Im not overly fond of these Jew types old boy"

dogma wrote: He's said a lot about destroying, removing, or otherwise eliminating Israel and Zionism, but that's not the same thing as genocide.

Twice in one thread

mattyrm wrote:but it most definitely was something along the lines of "Im not overly fond of these Jew types old boy"

I have now lol'd twice in this thread

I wonder if he is going to help with the Relocation of the Jews once he removes Isreal?

israel is a western power inflicted on the east because of nazi guilt and soviet fear and so on, turning it into the spoiled rich kid of the region as far as military assistance, while plenty of the region's people became misplaced by its existance. Now I really don't give a crap about what the bible says about the jews needing to rebuild a temple or how far muhammed walked from point a to point be... but some people do. That's what scares the nuclear community. The possibility of one guy or the next, turban or tie, doesn't matter, with the ability to say "HAR HAR SCREW EVERYONE" is enough to say NO DO NOT DEVELOP NUKES....

The wierd part develops. The people who say 'dont have nukes' are the people that have them. Those people, however, have PROVEN their lack of using them. If nobody wants to use one why do you want one? That would be the concerning question. Sure, get some nukes so your country can join the club of other countries who have nukes but don't use them?
duh.

The more obvious answer is CEASE THIS DEVELOPMENT OF DESCTRUCTION AND SHUT UP SIT DOWN AND BEHAVE, or we will use the ALREADY DEVELOPED DESTRUCTIVE POWER WE HAVE TO MAKE YOU SHUT UP AND SIT DOWN!!! RAAAH!

That causes diplomatical problems, though, and i'm sure ther neighbors, or civilian population would be kind of upset about all that would bring about.

It seems like a hostage situation to me. 'I COULD KILL ISRAEL... so let me have a nuke so that I can prove that I didn't?

meh. doesn't fly. If I am pointing a gun at someone and saying "don't try it" as he reaches for a gun, I wouldn't feel at all morally worried if he reaches for the gun and I kill him for doing so.

Iran will develop a nuke and, use-it-or-not, make all of their neghbors worried, again upsetting the already insane power structure of the place. We cannot just be picking up the pieces and avenging aggression after it happens. Powering down on Iranian nuke capability is preventative, not just waiting for something to happen to warrant it.

If I was president I would just say "HEY STOP OR WE'LL SHOOT!" and if they didn't, say "fine, we warned ya, have fun with yer wierdo afterlife expectancies or whatever we're done with that gak..."
blow the whole damn place up and more people would need hybrids, and a new religion (maybe one that doesn't involve the word 'infidel' or 'chosen' - might help stabilise folks... and so on.

I think that through the grammatical errors, and nonsensical structuring, there is a point in there that I might agree with...but I am not sure yet...

JEB_Stuart wrote:Yeah I am pretty sure by, "Blasting Israel from the face of the Earth," he really meant, "Send them all on vacation to Jamaica!" Those silly Iranians!

No, he meant destroying Israel, and at the very least killing the majority of its inhabitants. Not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Israeli. You can't commit genocide against Israelis, as they are not an ethnicity. What Ahmadinejad said is deplorable as is, there is no need to further confuse the issue by equivocation.

Honestly, I find it hilarious that the assumptive response to any statement which isn't "ZOMG!!! Ahmadinnerjacket is a genocidal, religious, psychopath without any human characteristics at all!!!" is that the speaker believes Ahmadinejad is entirely reasonable, and not at all antisemitic.

It boggles the mind how horrible reading comprehension becomes once value judgments and hyperbole are removed from a conversation.

Anyway, the Iranian state, and large swathes of the Iranian people, aren't simply antisemitic, they're also anti-Western. Israel is both Jewish, and a manifestation of Western imperialism. Any time it is discussed by the Iranian state, both these concepts are being referenced. If Iran were an Arab client state of the US, the rhetoric directed that way would still be just as bad. We would be able to deal with it on a more rational level, because there is less stigma surrounding the hatred between Arabs and Persians, but it would still be there. Underneath all the moralistic nonsense, this is an incredibly complex issue that gets whitewashed because of the Western tendency to both sympathize with Israel, and equate it with Judaism as a whole.

Mannahnin wrote: I doubt that even the pretty scummy and repressive government of Iran would drop the bomb, because they know Israel would annihilate them in return. It's Mutually Assured Destruction, much like us and the Soviets back in the day.

Here's where your argument fails: You assume the Iranian regime in power cares about it's continued existence at all costs.

I would submit to you that if the Ayatollah or Ahmadinejad thought that there was even a CHANCE that he could get a nuclear first strike on Israel and could destroy or cripple that nation (not an unrealistic expectation with nukes given you can traverse the entire country in minutes in a fast jet) he would be willing to take it, even if he thought he faced certain nuclear retaliation. After all, that just means he gets to his 70 virgins a little sooner.

Don't assume everyone's top motivation is self-preservation. What do you think makes suicide bombers tick? It ain't self preservation.

I would submit to you that if the Ayatollah or Ahmadinejad thought that there was even a CHANCE that he could get a nuclear first strike on Israel and could destroy or cripple that nation (not an unrealistic expectation with nukes given you can traverse the entire country in minutes in a fast jet) he would be willing to take it, even if he thought he faced certain nuclear retaliation. After all, that just means he gets to his 70 virgins a little sooner.

Your character assessment of the leadership of Iran falls fairly short of reality.

The Green Git wrote:
Don't assume everyone's top motivation is self-preservation. What do you think makes suicide bombers tick? It ain't self preservation.

Oh this is so true.

ShumaGorath wrote:Your character assessment of the leadership of Iran falls fairly short of reality.

Based on what? You? You do lunch with these guys?

I mean I know, all I have to go on is the stated goal from the lips of the leadership, and the observed behavior of the religious fanatics that share the beliefs of these two, along with the teachings of the 12th Imam which Ahmadinejad spouts... but then again all pales in the face of the Most Enlightened One, Shuma.

The Green Git wrote:
I would submit to you that if the Ayatollah or Ahmadinejad thought that there was even a CHANCE that he could get a nuclear first strike on Israel and could destroy or cripple that nation (not an unrealistic expectation with nukes given you can traverse the entire country in minutes in a fast jet) he would be willing to take it, even if he thought he faced certain nuclear retaliation. After all, that just means he gets to his 70 virgins a little sooner.

Ahmadinejad doesn't have that kind of authority; leaving us with Khamenei. Khamenei doesn't have the same theological convictions as Ahadinejad (he isn't a Twelver Shi'ite), and so doesn't hold to the same apocalyptic beliefs that Ahadinejad does. He's declared a fatwa on nuclear weapons, and Iran hasn't made any direct moves to actually weaponize its nuclear fuel. You're literally jumping 3-4 steps down the line in declaring that the Iranian state would certainly use nuclear weapons that it has not even been proven to be seeking with intention.

We can go into further detail in dissecting Khamenei's motivations, if you wish. I've got hundreds of pages of notes on the man's life and religious beliefs, but the strongest argument that exists against your stance is this:

If self-preservation is not important to Iran, then why are they showing restraint with respect to their policies in the Middle East? They could invade Iraq, and engage the US in open war to strike a blow against the West. They would almost certainly lose, but that shouldn't matter if your postulate is correct.

Moreover, your understanding of the potency of nuclear weapons is woeful. It would take far more than one primitive warhead to cripple Israel; especially considering the massive amount of aid they would receive in the wake of such an attack.

The Green Git wrote:
Don't assume everyone's top motivation is self-preservation. What do you think makes suicide bombers tick? It ain't self preservation.

Individualism in Islam isn't the same thing as individualism in the West. It is considered acceptable by many, but not all, to knowingly sacrifice yourself in the name of Islam. Though by a strict reading of the Koran it is wholly forbidden. However, to knowingly sacrifice an entire nation of Muslims is not comparable to the use of a suicide bomb, which sacrifices only a few lives at most.

To put it more simply: decisions which affect a nation are not grounded in self preservation, they are grounded in national preservation. It isn't a one to one comparison.

Guitardian, that's two posts of yours now that were nothing but ramblings.

I see that you are new here, please try to be a little more concise and less "all over the place".

It read more like a street bum rant than anything.

GG

Mannahin wrote:Iran’s younger population is relatively well-educated, egalitarian, and technologically literate. Remember that they held demonstrations in the street in OUR SUPPORT after 9/11.

Did none of you nuke-‘em advocates watch the demonstrations after the last election? The government is still pretty scummy, but the people are largely good folks, and would make good allies. I don’t want those people dead. As they gradually inherit the reins of power, Iran will be less and less of a threat, and more and more of an ally.


I’m not sure how peacefully the next few years will go, though.

I pretty much agree with Mannahin - Iran is actually one of the LEAST backwards (in terms of the population) countries in the Middle East. To be honest, there doesn't seem to be much difference between Israel and Iran - if anything, Israel is more aggressive. I'm not in favour of aligning ourselves with the Israelis - we don't owe them jack gak.

Of course Iran is going to engage in some some sabre-rattling and the occasional powerplay - they justifiably feel under threat.

Frazzled wrote:Or the real fear is they give one to Hezzbullah which does it for them.

Assuming they're Bond villains, as you are, why wouldn't they just launch it themselves? Far less chance of it being intercepted, and either everyone would know it was Iran that orchestrated the attack (nuclear scientists are very good at identifying the source of nuclear material).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jbunny wrote:Mann, the difference is the US and Russia were not lead by radical religious leaders that think they are doing God's work by killing all of the Jews.

Is your entire assessment of Iran's politics based on the snippets of Ahmadinejad's rhetoric shown in the popular media?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jbunny wrote:Do you really think that if Isreal was not a Jewish state there would still be problem in the Mid-East? And I mean problems on the scale that there is now.

Not a jewish state? So, like, patriate the Palestinians in Israel and the West Bank, resulting in Jews become a minority in the near future? I don't think that'll stop all the problems, but it'd likely be a huge step towards ending the violence. I'm not sure the Jews would be too happy with it, though, and I can't say I blame them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Green Git wrote:Based on what? You? You do lunch with these guys?

There isn't a shortage of text out there about the Iranian leadership. It's been a subject heavily studied by academics and intelligence professionals.

Your assertion that Iran's leadership has some apocalyptic vision akin to suicide bombers has not been reinforced by any of them. At this point you look like just another bloodthirsty netizen trying to justify killing a lot of people with a fantastical worldview.

So, now we have the possibility of nuclear fallout and Obama still isn't hurrying our troops out of the area? Perhaps all those black plastic FEMA coffins that are stockpiled all over the country should be in with their next supply shipments.

mattyrm wrote:...carpet bombing orphanages...

Hmm. Sounds like an idea.

We'll look into it.

warpcrafter wrote:So, now we have the possibility of nuclear fallout and Obama still isn't hurrying our troops out of the area? Perhaps all those black plastic FEMA coffins that are stockpiled all over the country should be in with their next supply shipments.

Coffin LINERS. They actually go around the coffin to ensure the corpses decay doesn't taint the surrounding Earth (or something).

Fateweaver wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:So, now we have the possibility of nuclear fallout and Obama still isn't hurrying our troops out of the area? Perhaps all those black plastic FEMA coffins that are stockpiled all over the country should be in with their next supply shipments.

Coffin LINERS. They actually go around the coffin to ensure the corpses decay doesn't taint the surrounding Earth (or something).

Yeah, liners go on the inside. These are meant to dispose of all the people who can't hack it in the concentration camps after the shadow government declares martial law. Besides, with all the barium chemtrails being shot into the sky to augment the HAARP array, the Earth is already pretty tainted.

Someone has been reading Angels and Daemons.

warpcrafter wrote:So, now we have the possibility of nuclear fallout and Obama still isn't hurrying our troops out of the area? Perhaps all those black plastic FEMA coffins that are stockpiled all over the country should be in with their next supply shipments.

Man, you people seriously have no idea how powerful a nuclear bomb is and isn't. The iranians don't have a four stage hydrogen fusion device like the kind we do, the best they could possibly hope for with what they have is a dirty bomb or a hiroshima-esque fission bomb, which is powerful enough to demolish a city, but would not spread a significant amount of fallout outside of its target city.